The Left-Wing Policy That AI Evangelists Suddenly Love

At the same time, it is not only the yield of well-being in cash, because its objective is to have fewer attached chains and to be easier to access. “It is not a net that holds people and assures them,” said Natalie Foster, president and founder of the economic security project. “It is a trampoline where people can have a floor on which they cannot fall, then jump and live the life of the agency and dignity and live in their own terms, which you cannot do if you work hand -to -mouth, or if you are in a in -depth economic uncertainty, which the future holds without daring political intervention.”

There are conversations that we must have about the UBI, separated from its potential as a balm for an apocalypse of the work. At the same time, the development of AI requires a discussion on what industry owes the company for the damage it will cause. “The value of the AI ​​is created by all our data, all our experiences, so everyone should have a participation in terms of” Michael Tubbs, the former mayor of Stockton, California, who led an AI project in his city – who presented in 2020 – and is now working with an organization called Mayors for guaranteed income. “People who will be injured must have a participation.”

Who works, how much they work and how they are compensated are political questions. Productivity gains in recent decades have led to benefits For the richest Americans, but many of us work harder than ever without seeing gains. If we do not solve these problems in the right way, our future will be even more unequal than todayWith enriched technological billionaires while the rest of us find it difficult to find new jobs and are encouraged to recycle or work harder. “I am afraid that inequalities will continue to worsen,” said Dr. Stuart Russell, IT professor at UC Berkeley. “Most gains are likely to go to technology owners.” And the AI ​​can hit jobs in white collar as severely as blue collar jobs have been struck by past technological changes.

For decades, economists and futurists have promised that technological gains will lead to an increase in leisure – trafficking, economist John Maynard Keynes thought that his grandchildren would work 15 hours a week – and that was not largely achieved. It is greatly true that we work less per week than our predecessors, said Russell. “That said, we certainly do not live a leisure life: as productivity improves, we consume much more than working much less.”